The substance of this habeas corpus action is that the prisoner is being restrained of his liberty because the indictment under which he was convicted fails to charge him with a crime, the same charging him with a mere conspiracy to commit robbery. The indictment adequately alleges a crime of robbery, and since the sole basis for the action is that the indictment failed to charge a crime, the court correctly refused to release the prisoner. See Camp v. State, 3 Ga. 417; Lipham v. State, 125 Ga. 52 (53 SE 817, 114 ASR 181, 5 AC 66); Brusnighan v. State, 86 Ga. App. 340 (71 SE2d 698).

Charles R. Smith, for plaintiff in error.